17th May 2005, 5:17 PM
You fail to understand the scientific approach. Science isn't about "absolute" answers, it can never hope to provide that. Trial and error and rational practice are PART of science. What science does is provide one great strength, self correction. It is capable of seeing where it's wrong and fixing it.
Your examples talk about discovering the mechanism for HOW it works, but have they actually discovered THAT it works? That is the issue at hand here. Before one can offer any explanations, they first must show the phenomenon actually factually exists. You speak of a bias, an egotism, but that is simply not the case for scientists. The ones who are being scientific embrace the fact that they do NOT know everything. On the other hand, those who proport various pseudoscientific claims will cling to any possible thing to show what they "know" to be true. Any evidence showing that something is not true or doesn't work is defended with countless ad hoc explanations.
Both the pages I listed speak of simple rational thought. Many of the mistakes you made are explained right there. How old a treatment is has no bearing on it's validity. How new a treatment is also has no bearing. How many people believe it also has no bearing. The latter however DOES show however that one should pay heed to them though. The only medicine I put any value in is scientifically proven medicine. Part of this IS rational thought. For example, given known facts about the body, and given known facts about the damage that may be done, bullet extraction from odd places can be done with a high degree of confidence in the methods, because of the high chances that the known facts are accurate. The links I provided are not to amateurs who made some pages for fun.
http://www.quackwatch.org/09Advisors/advbd.html
This is the list of scientific and medical advisors for the site "quackwatch". My doubts in what you say are not me doubting "the evil establishment", but rather doubing one who has not yet completed his studies, to defer to the wisdom of those who are professional medical doctors already.
This person (the host of the site) does a lot of research before writing up any articles on any particular bit of quackery. When he is in error, he is quick to correct it and call attention to it, which is actually more important. I didn't just search for some site that takes the same side as me. I've been visiting this site, as well as many other affiliated sites, for some time now. I visit them because I did some research of my own to see exactly how reliable their information is.
Chiefly, I must say this. I don't put 100% faith into any of these sites...
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://skepdic.com/
http://www.randi.org/
http://www.badastronomy.com/
http://www.skeptic.com/
But I do have high confidence in them. If something strikes me as odd, I question it. At any rate, I will say this. With all I've said, I will admit this. Should evidence show that in fact inserting needles into variuos nerves in the body can and does have a beneficial healing effect (outside pain relief), then I will gladly accept this. I don't know all the details on how nerve signals are encoded mind you, but my knowledge on how signals travel along lines leads me to believe that blunt trauma to the lines leads to nothing more than severing the connection. Thus, I have my doubts.
I must also say you are a very pleasent person to debate with now. This is most enjoyable actually. Certainly, a lot more rationality is present here than elsewhere in Tendo City. Whoever ends up proving their point in this, I can say that it was done with respect and rationality over insulting and emotions.
Your examples talk about discovering the mechanism for HOW it works, but have they actually discovered THAT it works? That is the issue at hand here. Before one can offer any explanations, they first must show the phenomenon actually factually exists. You speak of a bias, an egotism, but that is simply not the case for scientists. The ones who are being scientific embrace the fact that they do NOT know everything. On the other hand, those who proport various pseudoscientific claims will cling to any possible thing to show what they "know" to be true. Any evidence showing that something is not true or doesn't work is defended with countless ad hoc explanations.
Both the pages I listed speak of simple rational thought. Many of the mistakes you made are explained right there. How old a treatment is has no bearing on it's validity. How new a treatment is also has no bearing. How many people believe it also has no bearing. The latter however DOES show however that one should pay heed to them though. The only medicine I put any value in is scientifically proven medicine. Part of this IS rational thought. For example, given known facts about the body, and given known facts about the damage that may be done, bullet extraction from odd places can be done with a high degree of confidence in the methods, because of the high chances that the known facts are accurate. The links I provided are not to amateurs who made some pages for fun.
http://www.quackwatch.org/09Advisors/advbd.html
This is the list of scientific and medical advisors for the site "quackwatch". My doubts in what you say are not me doubting "the evil establishment", but rather doubing one who has not yet completed his studies, to defer to the wisdom of those who are professional medical doctors already.
This person (the host of the site) does a lot of research before writing up any articles on any particular bit of quackery. When he is in error, he is quick to correct it and call attention to it, which is actually more important. I didn't just search for some site that takes the same side as me. I've been visiting this site, as well as many other affiliated sites, for some time now. I visit them because I did some research of my own to see exactly how reliable their information is.
Chiefly, I must say this. I don't put 100% faith into any of these sites...
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://skepdic.com/
http://www.randi.org/
http://www.badastronomy.com/
http://www.skeptic.com/
But I do have high confidence in them. If something strikes me as odd, I question it. At any rate, I will say this. With all I've said, I will admit this. Should evidence show that in fact inserting needles into variuos nerves in the body can and does have a beneficial healing effect (outside pain relief), then I will gladly accept this. I don't know all the details on how nerve signals are encoded mind you, but my knowledge on how signals travel along lines leads me to believe that blunt trauma to the lines leads to nothing more than severing the connection. Thus, I have my doubts.
I must also say you are a very pleasent person to debate with now. This is most enjoyable actually. Certainly, a lot more rationality is present here than elsewhere in Tendo City. Whoever ends up proving their point in this, I can say that it was done with respect and rationality over insulting and emotions.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)